Dengism does not wo-

Attached: 1538589086638.jpg (602x425, 51.96K)

Other urls found in this thread:

revaim.org/uploads/booklets/China - A Modern Social-Imperialist Power.pdf
ft.com/content/b0ed4d21-bc9a-38dd-9af9-bc3aac6e7a13
ft.com/content/9d25d432-3be1-11e5-bbd1-b37bc06f590c#comments
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_China_(1949–present)#Recovery_from_war,_1949–52
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZIS-110
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1931/dec/13.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Porky thinks upward mobility is bad, QED

Attached: dengist dark ages.png (688x477, 133.19K)

Attached: trump-thinking-e1507254677550.jpg (700x466, 35.48K)

You do realise at some point Mao was taken to the back seat right? Not everything at that period was due to solely his own policies.

...

Its okay user, you can admit that you have literally no idea of even the timeline of modern chinese history so you didn't notice that the growth in upward mobility you were pointing to had absolutely nothing to do with deng or dengism and preceded him. We understand.

Attached: zhou enlai laughing.jpg (505x650, 67.48K)

The CR effectively ended in 1967, the beginnings of what Deng would build upon started from there.

Even Hoxha could turn a backwards country into one with a much better base, but only Deng and Zhou Enlai brought it to where it could challenge the united states.

China is a socialist state

The CR started in 1966 and didn't end until Mao sent the Red Guards to the countryside dumpass

because a socialist power would be in the WTO right?
revaim.org/uploads/booklets/China - A Modern Social-Imperialist Power.pdf

Some people would argue that since they have state owned enterprises.
But i think those industries have taken a back seat.
ft.com/content/b0ed4d21-bc9a-38dd-9af9-bc3aac6e7a13
China is more a keneysian fascist state now.

Actually nvm disregard that post.

The timeline shows the year people are born, not the year they were earning the money. There's going to be a lot of lag between the two things. You can't link the graph so easily to particular turning points in politics.

Activates your almonds checked


It's just some cheeky entryism lad

hmmmm

Attached: deng.png (602x425, 122.5K)

So then the whole thread is… pointless

chew on this dipshit
ft.com/content/9d25d432-3be1-11e5-bbd1-b37bc06f590c#comments

Mao was a nigger, yes but Deng was an even bigger nigger.

Wikipedia tells me the army reestablishing control around 1967 so it was no longer a yeah killem situation

Hmmm
"if China were to return to Maoist policies introduced in the aftermath of the disastrous Great Leap Forward, "

With a diagram as symmetrical as that for two variables which don't seem as if they would correlate so well, your diagram looks highly suspicious even if we leave the question of dates aside.

Attached: 1538680427725.jpg (250x140, 5.31K)

The increasing rate of income does not improve the standard of living if the increasing rate of property prices and rent far exceeds the former.

Socialism is when you develop the productive forces.

fucking checked my dude

China's property isn't bad outside of the SEZs, the development of 2nd and third tier cities basically is design to offset the centralization of money in the SEZs.

Rural parts of China will unironically march to Beijing if they get pissed off enough, thus the immediate actions towards developing the rural areas in catching up with the rest of China.

yeah your basically retarded as fuck, you posted a statistic of mao's leadership and it cuts off at deng. You then realize capitalism isn't good for china… so you continue on with your dengist bullshit and say "the more capitalist policies the more socialism amirite this is all marxist theory"

Flag checks out.

during mao's time economic planning was not always under only him, even in the initial stages there was still some level of private ownership: it can be hardly credited as the kind of "mao controlled it all" thing, where mao decided to apply his hand (the GLF and CR), the economy either took a dive (1958-60) or stagnated (1966-69),

Additionally deng got back by 1976:
"The new policies strengthened the authority of managers and economic decision makers at the expense of party officials, stressed material incentives for workers, and called for expansion of the research and education systems. Foreign trade was to be increased, and exchanges of students and "foreign experts" with developed countries were to be encouraged."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_China_(1949–present)#Recovery_from_war,_1949–52

you realize lenin did the same thing because for socialism you need build up for capitalism right, this isnt build up this is pure capitalism

Saged Bait Fucktard

...

yeah, but all i'm saying is that Mao's achievements came with the added knowledge of less fanatical leaders like Zhou and Deng, the minute he started espousing his own ideals of economic policies things got very messy.

And speaking about the USSR, it's economic history is quite colorful aswell, buying suspension designs from american tank designers and smuggling in colorless coke

Attached: 1489852519082.png (300x300, 147.63K)

you bring up smuggling in colourless coke like it was a big thing
it was just a personal order that zhukov requested, nothing more.

nothing can say "socialism" better than treating most equal comrades in better way than majority of population

what's next? muh dachas?
yeah dude zhukov ordered some coca cola woah why didn't every soviet citizens get some how oppresive this isn't true socialism

Attached: 82BC47F2-585C-45D0-9937-B4E883169609.jpeg (540x594, 44.96K)

I'm just saying the board seems to think in black and white, while in reality even the USSR had to do some back door deals with the americans to get technology, even to a point where one could argue stalin was
"in awe" of america's productive power.

hence essentially proving deng right, you need to be top dog to do any sort of socialism without your own people starting to leer over the fence, even if it means exploitation in a foreign country for the slight chance of becoming rich.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZIS-110

marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1931/dec/13.htm

Ludwig: I notice that in the Soviet Union everything American is held in very high esteem, I might even speak of a worship of everything American, that is, of the Land of the Dollar, the most out-and-out capitalist country. This sentiment exists also in your working class, and applies not only to tractors and automobiles, but also to Americans in general. How do you explain that?

Stalin: You exaggerate. We have no especially high esteem for everything American, nut we do respect the efficiency that the Americans display in everythingÑin industry, in technology, in literature and in life. We never forget that the U.S.A. is a capitalist country. But among the Americans there are many people who are mentally and physically healthy who are healthy in their whole approach to work, to the job on hand. That efficiency, that simplicity, strikes a responsive chord in our hearts. Despite the fact that America is a highly developed capitalist country, the habits prevailing in its industry, the practices existing in productive processes, have an element of democracy about them, which cannot be said of the old European capitalist countries, where the haughty spirit of the feudal aristocracy is still alive.

Ludwig: You do not even suspect how right you are.

Stalin: Maybe I do; who can tell?

In spite of the fact that feudalism as a social order was demolished long ago in Europe, considerable relies survive in manner of life and customs. There are still technicians, specialists, scientists and writers who have sprung from the feudal environment and who carry aristocratic habits into industry, technology, science and literature. Feudal traditions have not been entirely demolished.

That cannot be said of America, which is a country of "free colonists," without landlords and without aristocrats. Hence the sound and comparatively simple habits in American productive life. Our business executives of working-class origin who have visited America at once noted this trait. They relate, not without a certain agreeable surprise, that on a production job in America it is difficult to distinguish an engineer from a worker by outward appearance. That pleases them, of course.

Well, you are right. It really is oppressive. Having privileges others don't have just because those people wield political power kind of sucks and comes pretty close to being an actual class distinction if it isn't one.

if you determine the class nature of a country on something so petty you're being kinda silly.
is coca cola a privilege? can you really call it a "class distinction"? maybe if soviet officials were eating fancy food with coca cola while the average soviet citizen was eating rats we could consider it, but that's not the case.

He was instrumental in saving the world from fascism. He deserves to have a coke.